Age of Empires IV — Server-Side Patch 14681

Age of Empires IV IV - Discussion
42

What would keep the player that is clearly paying attention to what hes doing killing your sheep? If he can MANUALLY target your first sheep? Why can’t he just MANUALLY target your next sheep??

Scenario
You have 5 sheep trailing your scout. Khan catches up to you and starts to manually target sheep 1. You notice khan is targeting sheep 1 so you decide to stop command on sheep 1. Khan NOTICES sheep 1 has been stop commanded… khan changes his target to sheep 2 and keeps chasing you. What are you gonna do? Nothing but lose all your sheep untill you can get to base.

2 Likes
43

Terrible way to balance Mongols… taking away their speed buff. How are you supposed to fight with the buff spam towers were you want to fight? Just remove the speed and switch it up then it is very bad now and a huge nerf, stop doing things that affect low elo players, HRE is so broken now they can do 2TC at 5mins do you even test these changes? It seems they do not

44

No they should not. It is fine as it is in 4th

45

They didnt remove the speed buff you get when within range of a tower. They removed the 10s lingering speed buff AFTER you left the vicinity of a tower?? That’s a huge nerf???hmm

Also what are you referring to when you said

??

46

Yes, removing the 10 second lingering buff is a huge nerf. Yam unfortunately is poorly designed because its overly integrated into the core systems of the civilization. It touches every aspect of Mongol play, so a slight tweak will be either a large buff or nerf to the overall civilization depending on what they do with it.

For example, this nerf didn’t just negatively influence Deer Stones. Deer stones are still the meta. Because ironically although Deer Stones are a Yam centric wonder, removing linger grossly nerfed Silver Tree/trading too. So you have a patch that supposedly is addressing tower rushing, nerfing Mongol Economy and Military at all stages of play.

Now this is applauded mostly because plenty of players hate Mongols. Mongols are played by aggressive players and aggression, albeit even in a game based on conflict, stresses opponents out. On the forums that translates to tough talk, but in games, they are the boogeyman in the fog of war, especially in the general elo range. You don’t get to sit back and build some dream build order, ball up a big group of army and A move to victory. A good Mongol player is going to harass you every step of the way. Most people don’t find that fun. So most players that arn’t Mongol mains, will applaud any nerf regardless of balance.

Did this nerf bring balance? If their intent was to fix tower rushing. No. They used a chainsaw to pull out a splinter.

1 Like
47

Low elo I guess, if you do not see this as a huge nerf and a problem. A re-design was way better than this, watch any pro comment on this change and then come back any Beasty, MarineLord, TheMista, Voxtix pick your stream

48

The story is fine until you realize that at the highest elos the Mongols have always been in the top 2 civilizations.

The Yam network must be in range for the same reason as the castles network as well, there is an area of ​​effect that has to be respected.

The buff to the mangonel gives an indirect buff to the Mongol. That is something to keep in mind.

The Mongols will still be strong, but they will no longer dominate as before. That is what balance is.

5 Likes
49

Man you didn’t understand anything.

When the khan target the sheep he will keep shooting at the range limits. If you stop that sheep, he will probably react at best, a second later. This second is enough to get all your sheeps out of his range, BECAUSE HE WAS IN HIS RAMGE LIMIT BEFORE.

50

Show me the Data. I’ve seen all sorts of claims on this forum “proving” Mongols being broke. Generally followed up by data that either isn’t statistically relevant (within a few degrees) or is as abstract as general player retention. What it often boils down to is confirmation bias. They don’t like Mongols, which is fair, but instead of calling it what it is, try to use “science” to prove why nobody should like them.

The developer stated reason for nerfing Yam Network isn’t your stated reason. It had nothing to do with standardizing area of effect. The nerf was specifically for tower rushing. Let’s not add our own personally spin on clearly stated developer reasons for adjustments because of our own personal feelings. This goes back to confirmation bias. We’re making up a story to fit a world view that isn’t backed up by formal evidence.

Mangonel buff indirectly buffed everyone but English. I’d argue it’s an English nerf because globs of longbows have won far too many games with A move. Still do. Dev’s don’t get specific with their reasoning in the patch notes, but it’d be a safe bet the intention was to break up the crossbow meta, which was extremely stale gameplay.

I don’t really know what your last sentence means. It’s just random conjecture which appeals a reader’s preconceived bias. The Mongols will still be ____, but they will no longer ____ as before. That is what ___ is. You could fill in all these blanks with random words and without supporting evidence, it be as relevant as any other sentence.

51

I am aware that the Mongols do not have bonuses made for farms because they do not make them, and that they need an outpost due to the absence of walls, reduce the cost of the pasture and the outpost in the age of castles, to compensate for the nerf, but if I would like you to review the steppe bonus (150%!)

52

Watch until patch 11963, after that, go to Ranked 1vs1 and see the next 2 patches, see if that convinces you.

And it is curious that you ask for data when you have not given one, but an account of certain players who complain about a civilization for being aggressive.

You have come across someone who analyzes data. Greetings.

P.S: The Mangonel buff especially benefits Abbasids and then Mongols because you can do that siege on the field.

1 Like
53

All these ppl commenting that the 10s speed buff isa huge nerf are low level players. And clearly the guy asking where is the data supporting that Mongol is OP is a mongol main… (at some low level); b/c anyone paying the slightest attention to the ranking metrics updated EVERY PATCH at aoe4.world.com KNOWS Mongol has been top 3 win rate almost across all ranking (and use to be across all elo ranges) would never be asking for DATA supporting the OPness of mongols…

1 Like
54

I figured you were going to use AOE world as your cited source and knew you weren’t using correctly when the term “high elos” was used. AOE World doesn’t have reliable data on high elos. This is due to low sample sizes in the higher range and because of how matchmaking is matching high and low elo players together. The developers of AOE World actually have a posted warning about using their stats like this on the AOE World’s FAQ.

Same developer replys to this post, saying essentially the same thing.
“I will just add that I never really wanted to add >1600 as a filter because I kept repeating in comments on Reddit that sample rate is just too low and always be too low which results in statistically insignificant win rates and a lot of fluctuation. Eventuality I caved in after many requests.”

Can Win Rate stats now be trusted? - An understanding of the data : aoe4 (reddit.com)

((you’ll also notice in that reddit post that win-rate data cannot be trusted until meta’s settle. Which we’re not even close to. You still see 1000 - 1300 Elo plant their Mongo TC in ridiculous spots, and that’s literally the first choice they make every game))

So, when you use AOE world, you need to do more than look at the green and red numbers on the main page to understand the data. Go into the actual match history and look at what’s skewing the numbers. What you’ll notice is a huge portion of the win numbers are mostly coming from tower rushes. 10-15 minutes wins. Which is exactly what the Devs are trying to fix.

Now Tower rushing isn’t a Mongol only issue. For example, Chinese are capable tower rushers as well. But Mongols are the Civ best suited for it, simply for being able to put most everything under TC for DA/FA and Yam. The underlying issue isn’t Mongols. It’s Tower Rushing. That’s what needs fixed. Nerfing Yam will not stop tower rushing, in fact it’ll probably make it worse on the general ladder (~1000 Elo) because Silver Tree is even more of a Meme.

Why does Tower Rushing need a universal fix? It’s way harder to defend than to execute (unless you’re Mongols). Which further muddys the data, because now Mongols arn’t being Tower Rushed, the most popular strat on the ladder, because they can simply move their buildings at will.

Again, issue is Tower Rushing. Not standardizing area of effects or whatever other sillyness people are claiming. It’s not a civ specific issue, it’s a general game issue, however there are civs better designed to execute it and defend against it. It would have been far better to completely remove outposts in the DA across the board. But instead heavily nerf’d Mongol Economy and Military in an attempt to curb a cheesy strat available to all civilizations.

55

You could also learn something by reading my above post. Statistics are more complicated than looking at the green or red numbers on the main pages. Also, your correlation between elo and knowledge or skill is bad. The current match making system does not measure skill accurately. You can dodge without penalty and often get more points clubing newbies (600+) elo difference than playing against people within your bracket.

So I understand what you’re trying to say, it’s just not reality.

56

the burden on PROOOF that the stat presented are INVALID is on YOU… simply stating “these are not right” doesn’t make it not right… ESP since win rate has a STRONG correlation with patches that buff certain civs aka the english patch buff aka the abba patch buff aka the delhi patch buff etc eetc etc???

2 Likes
57

The statistic isn’t invalid. What you’re attempting to make the statistic mean however, is an abuse of mathematics. There’s a difference. Now, had you have taken the time to read the reddit OP that was posted, you could possibly understand why using win-rate as a raw indication of civilization performance is… dangerous.

Also, when you’re quoting someone, you should probably use something that was actually said within those quotes and unless you’re running for politics, should keep that quote in context. Just a fun life skill tip.

58

Add up all the high elo games from all the patches and you have a more reliable sample of how the Mongols have been for months.

Almost all professionals have said that Mongols have always been in S-Tier. It is not an exclusive complaint of low elos (they complain more about the English rush, the French knight or the siege at the time).

I don’t see the tower rush as bad, but there are certain extra elements that have made the Mongols very powerful and I think they are now very good with the change.

1 Like
59

Its about time to give Chinese their 2 starting villagers back. Or atleast make them start with an IO.

Also where are the buffs/changes to NoB? NoB still have 200 HP whereas Mangonels have 260. NoB take only 2 shots to destroy from a Springald, which forces Chinese to onld build NoB from the Clocktower. Ontop of this NoB have less range than Mangonels.

The devs want you to think that Chinese has bonuses, but in the case of NoB you are forced to only produce from the Landmark just to make their own unique unit, the NoB usable when compared to a Mangonel. This is terrible design. NoB should be a better Mangonel regardless of where you build it!

Also Granaries are still a trap and not worth building. Revert the nerfs and reduce their costs to 100 wood!

What about cost reduction for Dynasties or buffs to Landmarks?

Chinese Landmarks are still a joke. See the Great Wall gatehouse. Its been a completely useless Landmark ever since closed beta. It hasn’t been changed at all. Neither has the Spirit way, which should be a global cost reduction instead. Reduce it to 20% to compensate.

No one ever builds the Yuan Dynasty for Fire Lancers now, since Fire Lancers got nerfed into garbage just because of team games.

Now that team game maps have been reduced in size, which is exactly what we suggested at the start instead of nerfing Firelancers, why do Chinese not get a buff for Firelancers again to make them worth using?

60